California OAH special education order · May 2, 2017
Order Denying Request for Continuance Without Prejudice
OAH Case No. 2017020382 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH denied without prejudice the parties' joint second continuance request because it lacked a declaration from Student's attorney showing when the conflicting federal court hearing and mediation were scheduled.
This case went to decision
Student v. Oxnard Union High School District: Oxnard Union High must fund three IEEs, 15 hours of speech therapy, and a male restroom paraeducator; occupational therapy claim denied. (2017)
Summary
Both parties jointly asked OAH for a second continuance of the May 9, 2017 hearing because Student's attorney had a conflicting appearance in federal district court and an OAH mediation in another case. OAH denied the request without prejudice and kept all dates in place. The request had no declaration from Student's attorney stating when the federal court hearing and the mediation were scheduled, and it did not give the case number for the mediation. OAH said it would likely grant the short continuance if the request were refiled with that information, and that good cause would exist if the federal matter was scheduled after March 22, 2017.
Why it matters
A joint request does not guarantee a continuance, especially a second one. Attorneys claiming a scheduling conflict should attach a declaration showing when the conflicting event was set, along with any case numbers, or the request may be denied.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a) & (c)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c)
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d)
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2017020382 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE WITHOUT
OXNARD UNION HIGH SCHOOL PREJUDICE
DISTRICT.
On May 1, 2017, the parties filed a joint second request to continue the dates in this matter with the Office of Administrative Hearings, based upon availability of legal counsel for Student. OAH granted the parties’ previous continuance request on March 23, 3017, and set the hearing to begin on May 9, 2017.
A due process hearing must be conducted and a decision rendered within 45 days of receipt of the due process notice unless an extension is granted for good cause. (34 C.F.R.
§ 300.515(a) & (c) (2006); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020.) As a result, continuances are disfavored. Good cause may include the unavailability of a party, counsel, or an essential witness due to death, illness or other excusable circumstances; substitution of an attorney when the substitution is required in the interests of justice; a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or another significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for hearing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).) OAH considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including the proximity of the hearing date; previous continuances or delays; the length of continuance requested; the availability of other means to address the problem giving rise to the request; prejudice to a party or witness as a result of a continuance; the impact of granting a continuance on other pending hearings; whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; whether the parties have stipulated to a continuance; whether the interests of justice are served by the continuance;
and any other relevant fact or circumstance. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d).)
OAH has reviewed the request for good cause and considered all relevant facts and circumstances. The request is:
Denied. All prehearing conference and hearing dates are confirmed and shall proceed as calendared. The continuance request discusses a conflict with an appearance in Federal District Court and a scheduled mediation with OAH. However, the continuance request does not include a declaration from Student’s attorney as to when the District Court noticed the hearing and the scheduling of the mediation.
Good cause for a continuance would exist if the District Court matter was scheduled after March 22, 2017. As to the OAH mediation, the continuance request does not provide the case number for that matter. Accordingly, the parties’ continuance request is denied without prejudice as OAH would be inclined to grant the short continuance requested if the request included a declaration with the information discussed above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: May 2, 2017
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings